The proposed research concerns the role of personal similarity in attribution and social influence processes. Three major areas and several related questions are explored. The central questions are: 1) what kinds of attributions do people make about the opinions of other people, 2) when, if at all, are dissimilar persons preferred for social comparison, and 3) when is agreement or social support from dissimilar others more influential than agreement from similar others. The research proposes to extend 1) experimental findings derived from attribution theory which suggest dissimilar others can be more influential under limited sets of circumstances, and 2) an attributional analysis of social comparison theory which suggests the circumstances under which comparison with dissimilar others provides high information gain. In addition, the research explores various impression formation and group process issues related to the above. Hypotheses will be explored by asking subjects to make judgments about other people, interpersonal situations or political issues on the basis of video-taped or written information about these questions. After judgments are made, subjects can be asked to choose another whose opinions they would like to compare with their own, or they can be asked about their reactions to an opinion from another person which is provided for them.